↓ Skip to main content

“Communicate to vaccinate”: the development of a taxonomy of communication interventions to improve routine childhood vaccination

Overview of attention for article published in BMC International Health and Human Rights, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
“Communicate to vaccinate”: the development of a taxonomy of communication interventions to improve routine childhood vaccination
Published in
BMC International Health and Human Rights, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-698x-13-23
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie Willis, Sophie Hill, Jessica Kaufman, Simon Lewin, John Kis-Rigo, Sara Bensaude De Castro Freire, Xavier Bosch-Capblanch, Claire Glenton, Vivian Lin, Priscilla Robinson, Charles S Wiysonge

Abstract

Vaccination is a cost-effective public health measure and is central to the Millennium Development Goal of reducing child mortality. However, childhood vaccination coverage remains sub-optimal in many settings. While communication is a key feature of vaccination programmes, we are not aware of any comprehensive approach to organising the broad range of communication interventions that can be delivered to parents and communities to improve vaccination coverage. Developing a classification system (taxonomy) organised into conceptually similar categories will aid in: understanding the relationships between different types of communication interventions; facilitating conceptual mapping of these interventions; clarifying the key purposes and features of interventions to aid implementation and evaluation; and identifying areas where evidence is strong and where there are gaps. This paper reports on the development of the 'Communicate to vaccinate' taxonomy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 131 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 16%
Researcher 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 14 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 37%
Social Sciences 21 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 24 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 September 2015.
All research outputs
#3,357,938
of 12,410,115 outputs
Outputs from BMC International Health and Human Rights
#165
of 330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,326
of 144,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC International Health and Human Rights
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,410,115 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 330 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 144,497 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them